Contempt during separation prior to divorce court.

[Mtnstyne2001]

Those don't really seem to prove that they're cohabiting...

Fortunately cohabitation isn't necessary but I see your point. It's very difficult to prove cohabitation without access to the home. I suppose I could camp outside and continue to take photos over time. What in your opinion would prove cohabitation without having access to their mail or paperwork?

 

[stealth2]

Fortunately cohabitation isn't necessary but I see your point. It's very difficult to prove cohabitation without access to the home. I suppose I could camp outside and continue to take photos over time. What in your opinion would prove cohabitation without having access to their mail or paperwork?

It seems that SC considers even introducing a "paramour" to the children a violation. That said, the activities that you describe having photos really don't prove that they are anything beyond friends. As @AlmostThere pointed out, having friends - even of the opposite gender - join outings on one's parenting time isn't precluded, nor does it prove anything approaching a sexual relationship.

I really think y'all are wasting time on this. I figured that the time spent with a new g/f was time he wasn't trying to make my life miserable.

 

[Mtnstyne2001]

It seems that SC considers even introducing a "paramour" to the children a violation. That said, the activities that you describe having photos really don't prove that they are anything beyond friends. As @AlmostThere pointed out, having friends - even of the opposite gender - join outings on one's parenting time isn't precluded, nor does it prove anything approaching a sexual relationship.

I really think y'all are wasting time on this. I figured that the time spent with a new g/f was time he wasn't trying to make my life miserable.

Once again. She is admittedly the paramour by the husband. It is not in question. She was first identified by the evidence presented when he was caught cheating. It was then included in the investigation by the Guardian Ad Litem where the paramour SAT DOWN AND DID AN INTERVIEW.

So here's the facts. The court order states "The defendant is prohibited from exposing the children to his paramour at any time." The paramour has been identified by name and recorded in the documents and report by the GAL. The pictures show her with the kids at the house and other locations.

You don't seem to get it. He is already doing everything he can to make her life miserable. He already kept the children from her for over a month while the youngest was only a few months old. He took them to his mothers house because he knew she could still legally enter their marital home, but not his mothers home. It required a court order for her to see her kids again. That isn't going to change because it's in his nature.

If I may ask, what is your experience in this field and in South Carolina family law? This thread has gone way of topic with people offering plenty of opinions on why not to attempt to enforce a court order because it may be "uncomfortable". Passive approach and trying to play nice with him is a sign of weakness and something to prey upon.

 

[LdiJ]

Once again. She is admittedly the paramour by the husband. It is not in question. She was first identified by the evidence presented when he was caught cheating. It was then included in the investigation by the Guardian Ad Litem where the paramour SAT DOWN AND DID AN INTERVIEW.

So here's the facts. The court order states "The defendant is prohibited from exposing the children to his paramour at any time." The paramour has been identified by name and recorded in the documents and report by the GAL. The pictures show her with the kids at the house and other locations.

You don't seem to get it. He is already doing everything he can to make her life miserable. He already kept the children from her for over a month while the youngest was only a few months old. He took them to his mothers house because he knew she could still legally enter their marital home, but not his mothers home. It required a court order for her to see her kids again. That isn't going to change because it's in his nature.

If I may ask, what is your experience in this field and in South Carolina family law? This thread has gone way of topic with people offering plenty of opinions on why not to attempt to enforce a court order because it may be "uncomfortable". Passive approach and trying to play nice with him is a sign of weakness and something to prey upon.

We are giving you advice based on many years of seeing people make mistakes in how they handle divorce/separation/child custody. For example, I would be a seriously rich woman if I had a dollar for every person I have seen blow their entire legal budget on stuff like you have outlined here, leaving nothing available to cover the more serious needs of property settlements and child custody issues. I also see people end up so far in legal debt that when something really serious happens later down the road, they have no money to deal with it.

This guy sounds like the kind of guy that is willing to spend money making your daughter's life miserable for as long as he can. If your daughter/you cannot comfortably outspend him, then it is time for her to pick and choose her battles.

Also, I really have seen dozens of men (and some women too) who simply turned around and married the person they were ordered not to have around the children, just to remove the "paramour" issue... AFTER the other parent had spent massive amounts of money trying to enforce the court orders. And you know why they do it? They do it because they want somebody else there to take care of the children, so they don't have to do it themselves.

 

[Zigner]

Once again. She is admittedly the paramour by the husband. It is not in question. She was first identified by the evidence presented when he was caught cheating. It was then included in the investigation by the Guardian Ad Litem where the paramour SAT DOWN AND DID AN INTERVIEW.

So here's the facts. The court order states "The defendant is prohibited from exposing the children to his paramour at any time." The paramour has been identified by name and recorded in the documents and report by the GAL. The pictures show her with the kids at the house and other locations.

You don't seem to get it. He is already doing everything he can to make her life miserable. He already kept the children from her for over a month while the youngest was only a few months old. He took them to his mothers house because he knew she could still legally enter their marital home, but not his mothers home. It required a court order for her to see her kids again. That isn't going to change because it's in his nature.

If I may ask, what is your experience in this field and in South Carolina family law? This thread has gone way of topic with people offering plenty of opinions on why not to attempt to enforce a court order because it may be "uncomfortable". Passive approach and trying to play nice with him is a sign of weakness and something to prey upon.

I have two suggestions after this post:
1) Be willing to consider other viewpoints.
2) Have your daughter talk to her attorney.

Best of luck to her and the kids.

 

[Zigner]

Pictures as in plural. Shows the paramour alone with one of the children entering a vehicle and departing together. Another shows all 4 departing a retail location together with one child in the hands of each adult and loading into the vehicle again. Shortly after that photos show all 4 again departing McDonalds together, one child carried by each adult, and lastly all 4 at the residence loading the vehicle to make the drive to drop them off at the end of his custody period.

Ok, one more thing: Many moons ago, when I took my kids and left my drug-abusing wife, I moved in with my best friend. SHE and I did a lot with the kids until I was able to figure things out and get a place of my own with my kids.

 

[stealth2]

You don't seem to get it. He is already doing everything he can to make her life miserable. He already kept the children from her for over a month while the youngest was only a few months old. He took them to his mothers house because he knew she could still legally enter their marital home, but not his mothers home. It required a court order for her to see her kids again. That isn't going to change because it's in his nature.

If I may ask, what is your experience in this field and in South Carolina family law? This thread has gone way of topic with people offering plenty of opinions on why not to attempt to enforce a court order because it may be "uncomfortable". Passive approach and trying to play nice with him is a sign of weakness and something to prey upon.

Actually... you don't seem to "get it"... She has going on a minimum of 17/18 years for him to find any number of different ways to make her life miserable via the kids. This is nothing compared to what he can try when the kids are older. Trust me on that.

It's not a matter of being passive and not wanting something to be uncomfortable. Rather, it is all about staying several moves ahead in a very serious game of chess, and choosing which pawns to sacrifice for greater rewards down the line. That's not weakness. It's playing a strategic game.

Best of luck to your daughter and grandchildren.

 

[adjusterjack]

So here's the facts. The court order states "The defendant is prohibited from exposing the children to his paramour at any time."

What, exactly, do you think a contempt citation will accomplish? A fine? He's got lots of money. Jail? Not gonna happen? An admonishment by the judge? Isn't likely to stop the behavior. And once you reveal that you surveilled him and took photos, he's likely to figure out how to elude you.

I agree with Stealth2 and have two words for you: Pyrrhic Victory.

Consider, instead, moving for supervised visitation with the paramour absent. Your daughter picks the place, maybe even at your home, where he can be denied visitation if he shows up with the paramour.

 

[commentator]

As someone who has been involved with mediation, I would implore you, concerned dad, to stop, back off, stop undercutting and mistrusting and trying to run this thing without your attorney. If the court gets the slightest bit of a hint that you are there in the background, trying to pull off even this 'pyrrhic victory" in other words, trying to tell the court how to rule because I've got the proof here, my baby girl's been mistreated, etc etc.....and she will lose, in a big way. Because rural southern courts are primitive. The lawyer needs to run this case. You need to pay, if you're going to, and then put your trust in their advice and what they want .

 

[Mtnstyne2001]

As someone who has been involved with mediation, I would implore you, concerned dad, to stop, back off, stop undercutting and mistrusting and trying to run this thing without your attorney. If the court gets the slightest bit of a hint that you are there in the background, trying to pull off even this 'pyrrhic victory" in other words, trying to tell the court how to rule because I've got the proof here, my baby girl's been mistreated, etc etc.....and she will lose, in a big way. Because rural southern courts are primitive. The lawyer needs to run this case. You need to pay, if you're going to, and then put your trust in their advice and what they want .

This will be my last post on this thread.

My daughter spoke to her lawyer TWICE this week. HIS advice was to hire a private investigator because everyone knows this is occurring. HIS advice is to file this contempt after reviewing the evidence. HIS advice is that this will help in the case where the husband is asking for FULL CUSTODY, not shared, not him supervised, full custody where my daughter has NO CUSTUDY. I am not making the decisions. I am not undercutting anyone including the lawyer or my daughter. I merely did the work that the PI could have possibly done, but for less than 10% the cost. A cost that otherwise my daughter would not have been able to afford.

 

[LdiJ]

This will be my last post on this thread.

My daughter spoke to her lawyer TWICE this week. HIS advice was to hire a private investigator because everyone knows this is occurring. HIS advice is to file this contempt after reviewing the evidence. HIS advice is that this will help in the case where the husband is asking for FULL CUSTODY, not shared, not him supervised, full custody where my daughter has NO CUSTUDY. I am not making the decisions. I am not undercutting anyone including the lawyer or my daughter. I merely did the work that the PI could have possibly done, but for less than 10% the cost. A cost that otherwise my daughter would not have been able to afford.

I am a bit amazed that any attorney would feel it necessary to have additional ammo to fight an ask for full custody from either parent. Normally, that is just a no go, period, these days. Unless the husband is alleging or has some kind of evidence of unfitness on your daughter's part (which obviously isn't the case since she has full temporary custody) his own attorney should be telling him it is a no go. I can see where the dad's refusal to honor court orders could be of some help, but it is help that really shouldn't even be needed. Nobody gets full custody these days unless the other parent is truly unfit in some way. It is always some form of joint legal custody (joint decision making) with varying types of timeshares as far as physical custody is concerned.

 

[stealth2]

This will be my last post on this thread.

My daughter spoke to her lawyer TWICE this week. HIS advice was to hire a private investigator because everyone knows this is occurring. HIS advice is to file this contempt after reviewing the evidence. HIS advice is that this will help in the case where the husband is asking for FULL CUSTODY, not shared, not him supervised, full custody where my daughter has NO CUSTUDY. I am not making the decisions. I am not undercutting anyone including the lawyer or my daughter. I merely did the work that the PI could have possibly done, but for less than 10% the cost. A cost that otherwise my daughter would not have been able to afford.

Just something to chew on - your daughter realizes that her lawyer is *also* looking at increasing his own fees, right?

 

[Zigner]

I merely did the work that the PI could have possibly done, but for less than 10% the cost. A cost that otherwise my daughter would not have been able to afford.

I misinterpreted this previously...I thought you hired a PI, but now I realize that *you* took the pictures. Expect your "evidence" to be severely slammed by the other side.

 

[not2cleverRed]

My daughter spoke to her lawyer TWICE this week. HIS advice was to hire a private investigator because everyone knows this is occurring. HIS advice is to file this contempt after reviewing the evidence. HIS advice is that this will help in the case where the husband is asking for FULL CUSTODY, not shared, not him supervised, full custody where my daughter has NO CUSTUDY. I am not making the decisions. I am not undercutting anyone including the lawyer or my daughter. I merely did the work that the PI could have possibly done, but for less than 10% the cost. A cost that otherwise my daughter would not have been able to afford.

Your daughter has a lawyer. You can get a consult (paid or not) with other SC divorce lawyers to get a reality check on whether her lawyer is giving her realistic legal advice.

If I recall correctly, SC is one of the few places where adultery is legally relevant in court. But from a practical point of view, merely being a cad does not prove poor parenting. Realistically, after separation, the only concern about Dad's sexploits should be the effect that his activities are having on the children.

The priority should be "the best interests of the children". Even though they are very young, perhaps you should consider helping your daughter find therapy resources for them. Focus on their mental and emotional health. (Having an independent qualified professional who is a mandate reporter involved can be helpful legally as well, if it turns out that there is really something negative going on.)

 

[commentator]

Your daughter has a lawyer. You can get a consult (paid or not) with other SC divorce lawyers to get a reality check on whether her lawyer is giving her realistic legal advice.likewi
If I recall correctly, SC is one of the few places where adultery is legally relevant in court. But from a practical point of view, merely being a cad does not prove poor parenting. Realistically, after separation, the only concern about Dad's sexploits should be the effect that his activities are having on the children.

The priority should be "the best interests of the children". Even though they are very young, perhaps you should consider helping your daughter find therapy resources for them. Focus on their mental and emotional health. (Having an independent qualified professional who is a mandate reporter involved can be helpful legally as well, if it turns out that there is really something negative going on.)

Excellent advice! I can just hear in everything being posted how desperately this dad wants to control the action, or at least get it told like he wants it told. And that so seldom works in a courtroom situation! And it may cause the whole thing to go south severely. Having a therapist might be better than any private eyes!

As in the military, the person in command does not like to hear either of the parties in the case trying to tell them what to do or think or rule. And the luckiest thing that could happen to the mom could be for the other party (wealthy and confident father) to come across this way and for the judge to be turned against him. This is much more likely to happen due to his behavior and arrogance when he is actually before the court and the attorneys he has working for him than any sort of proof of his violation of the paramour clause. Which, as someone pointed out, can be subject to much questioning and a lot of distraction from the most important thing, which is the best possible arrangement for the children.

There is a slight "yuck" factor in this whole thing of sneaking around taking pictures to prove someone is doing this and that. Something really bad that I could see happening is that dad goes back for more proof of wrongdoing and violation of the paramour clause, and gets arrested for trespassing, or some kind of scene insues. If they are very determined to take this route, it would really be better if this "proof" were obtained by another party. If the children's father has an idea that his soon to be ex-father-in-law is stalking around and taking pictures of him for use against him in court, this is a situation that may go very bad very quickly. And I am afraid this is not going to carry nearly as much weight in court as this poster would like to imagine. I have seen the whole "proven adultery" thing be so much less important ultimately than the accusing spouse imagines it will be.